I explained it in the post the body needs some archadonic acid so you have to take in some omega 6's. You also need to take in either ALA, DHA or EPA for your omega 3.

I understand. What I'm saying is what makes you think the human body needs some arachidonic acid? "Need" implies it is essential. Technically you don't need to eat any carbohydrate if you eat adequate protein, or any fat since the body can manufacture SFA and MUFA from sugars.

Originally Posted by Ron_Swanson

Wow you are against Omega 3 and Omega 6's, but you ate a ton of fructose (and if those strawberries weren't organic some of the worse fluoride pesticides you can ingest). There are studies a mile wide that prove that fructose consumption should be kept to a bare minimum of no more than 20 grams a day. Greens are goitrogenic RAW, if you steam them the goitogenic property is great lessened, even almost non existent. To limit Broccoli consumption completely because it is goitrogenic is ludicrous. Broccoli is great for you, DIM and I3C in broccoli is important to any male in this estrogen filled toxic world.

I strongly disagree that fructose has any negative effect on the body. I'm not interested in epidemiological "studies" that show people consuming 1,000 calories of HFCS a day is harmful. That's a no-brainer. I've yet to see a study showing fruit to be unhealthy when reasonable consumption is exercised. If you're going to stuff your face to a huge caloric surplus daily, it probably doesn't matter what it is - it isn't healthy.

I soak my fruits in hot, soapy water. Strawberries get washed and the tops are removed. I'm not worried. I didn't say I didn't eat greens. I eat 3 heads of romaine a week, along with a 3 lb bag of green peppers. Carrots...so many carrots. I simply said potatoes are healthier.

Last edited by ChocoTaco369; 06-17-2013 at 01:15 PM.

Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

The funny thing about arachidonic acid is that most pro fish oil research is going to show how it protects against arachidonic acid

Essential fatty acids are toxic to in warm-blooded respiring animals, this is why your body doesn't produce any. PUFA in abundance is found in icy climates, or from nuts and seeds that have to germinate in cool weather after freezing winters.

The funny thing about arachidonic acid is that most pro fish oil research is going to show how it protects against arachidonic acid

Essential fatty acids are toxic to in warm-blooded respiring animals, this is why your body doesn't produce any. PUFA in abundance is found in icy climates, or from nuts and seeds that have to germinate in cool weather after freezing winters.

Fish don't produce much SFA because if they did, they'd freeze in the water. SFA is rock hard at refrigerator temperatures. Similarly, PUFA, specifically omega 3, is liquid at freezing temperatures. They have PUFA out of necessity. For us, more than incidental is bad news because it causes cell membrane leakage and rapid oxidation in our warm blooded temperatures. SFA and MUFA don't experience this, which is why my original post shows oleic acid having very low AGE production while omega 6 c:18 and c:20 are both through the roof. Glucose stores mostly as SFA with some MUFA, so it is very stable as well.

Mind you, I don't believe eating walnuts has the same effect as canola oil, and I don't believe eating wild salmon has the same effect as taking refined fish oil. The vitamin and mineral content, particularly Vitamin E and furan fatty acids listed below seem to mitigate the risk. I don't think anyone is going to die from eating salmon. From consuming hexane-extracted salmon oil...well...that's different.

I'm not extreme about this. I just think there are better choices. Why use avocado oil when you can use coconut oil or ghee, for instance.

I find this opinion hard to swallow, one need only search google scholar and find studies where 3's have provided some benefit for something.

Originally Posted by Ron_Swanson

Also not all omega 6's are the same. the source of your omega 6 either leaves you with LA (not that great) or GLA (the GOOD OMEGA 6). GLA is converted into DGLA in the body if you are sufficient in magnesium, zinc, and vitamins C, B3, and B6. DGLA is pro good inflammatory response.

And if you don't believe me about inflammation being good take a lot of SOD. You die rather quickly from the lack of inflammatory responses in the body.

A nutrition and biochem lecturer said the problem with too much saturated fat from animals favours DGLA conversion to AA instead of DGLA producing PgE1 or something like that. Im thinking that if sat fat does indeed inhibits delta 5 & 6 desaturase then neither ALA or LA can proceed past ETA or DGLA so DGLA could be converted to PgE1 but if the diet contained animals that specifically contained AA such as tuna, pork, duck, chicken which contain the highest amount of AA (aside from salmon), then that AA would unfortunately proceed to the proinflammatory eicosanoids. But supplementing with or eating foods high in specifically EPA could counter through conversion to the less inflammatory eicosanoids.

Whats SOD stand for?

Originally Posted by ChocoTaco369

Studies revolving around omega 3's today are reminiscent of studies revolving around omega 6's 40 years ago. I see little compelling evidence showing they're important, and none showing they're "essential fatty acids." I do, however, see concrete fact that they are extremely prone to oxidation, particularly EPA and DHA. They are the most fragile fats in nature.

You mentioned similar in another thread of mine but I posted an interesting study that may prove that EFAs are "Essential"

the "requirement" of these fatty acids to prevent "deficiency" in the diet is so miniscule, and research can't point out that number, or whether or not other portions of the diet provide all necessary synthesis steps, such as b6, zinc, magnesium, calcium, etc;

A nutrition and biochem lecturer said the problem with too much saturated fat from animals favours DGLA conversion to AA instead of DGLA producing PgE1 or something like that. Im thinking that if sat fat does indeed inhibits delta 5 & 6 desaturase then neither ALA or LA can proceed past ETA or DGLA so DGLA could be converted to PgE1 but if the diet contained animals that specifically contained AA such as tuna, pork, duck, chicken which contain the highest amount of AA (aside from salmon), then that AA would unfortunately proceed to the proinflammatory eicosanoids. But supplementing with or eating foods high in specifically EPA could counter through conversion to the less inflammatory eicosanoids.

This seems interesting if only i could understand it anyone care to translate it in layman's